Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 77
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SJ5382 View Post
    Surely you can agree that there are better ways to assess a team than wins and losses, considering how important luck is in baseball.

    No, not in the slightest, if you've won 74 games out of 162 games then you're a 74 win team.

    Luck is just another excuse for failure.

    You can make baseball stats say anything you want, there's so many of them, so many interpretations and approaches, I think fans fall back on stats when reality is too painful, "let's ignore the only stat that matters which is the standings and pretend we're a 90 win WAR team".

    The Orioles are not a great team but they found ways to win, over and over again, and that's all that matters, so did the A's. Not quite sure how Mets fans can talk about outlier seasons when we have won nothing since 2006, and been in the post season one since 2000 - how's that for an outlier?

    Too many baseball fans think the sport is played out on spreadsheets, it's not.
    Last edited by Marty Mcfly; 01-04-2013 at 09:48 AM.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    29,398
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SJ5382 View Post
    Davis was nothing special at all for a first baseman playing at Camden Yards (can't buy a walk and strikes out a ton), and Markakis/Machado combined to play only 155 games. Going forward, they're definitely more talented, but in 2012 they weren't much better than us, if at all. Especially considering the fact that David Wright played out of his mind.
    Baltimore had 7 regulars with a positive ops+, The Mets had 4 including Hairston. Manny Machado replaces one of them.

    Is Tejada as good as Machado? Manny played at 19 last year.
    Let's be fair here.

    Is anyone in our outfield as good as Nick Markakis?

    or Nolan Reimold for that matter?


    "You don't know how to drink. Your whole generation, you drink for the wrong reasons. My generation, we drink because it's good, because it feels better than unbuttoning your collar, because we deserve it. We drink because it's what men do."

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    Is anyone in our OF as good as Dr. Nick?

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montville, nj
    Posts
    2,407
    vCash
    1500
    No chance in hell do the mets make the palyoffs this year. Our only hope is the Wilpons sell the team. If not we will not make the playoffs for some years to come. 2014 will be the year to see if the Wipons are broke or have money to spend. I vote for they are broke

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,995
    vCash
    1500
    I like this excercise.

    Replacement level is 52 or 53 wins, since we're using Baseball-Reference here, not fangraphs. Instead of adding up the entire roster, lets just say you need to find a way to build a respectable enough pen and bench, so that there are enough positives there to offset the negatives. So I'm going to say get 38 WAR from your top 15 players (8 regulars, 5 SP, 2 top pen arms) and you're over 90 wins. The St Louis Cardinals last season for instance, snuck into the playoffs with 88 wins and 35.3 WAR from those players.

    My view of what a shocking Mets playoff run might have to look like from those 15 players:

    6.4 Wright
    3.8 Davis
    2.8 Tejada
    2.2 Murphy
    2.1 d'Arnaud
    1.8 Duda
    1.8 Nieuwenhuis
    1.5 outfielder x

    3.5 Niese
    3.3 Harvey
    2.8 Santana
    1.9 Wheeler
    1.5 Gee
    1.5 Parnell
    1.1 Francisco

    I think this is a little more realistic than Mark Simon's. In short, if the Mets are going anywhere next year, I think it's going to be because their best young players stepped up and topped their previous best performances. Simon's suggestion that Santana could have another Cy Young type season at this stage seems much less likely than Ike Davis being better at age 26 than he was at 23, or Ruben Tejada being better at 23 than he was at 21-22, or Matt Harvey delivering twice as many WAR in 30 starts as he did last year in 10 starts.

    In short, everyone needs to step up and get a little better, and you need to get something from Wheeler and d'Arnaud, but you don't need any major miracles. Instead, lots of minor miracles. Still very unlikely, and there's not really enough depth here to make up for it if things do start to go wrong and some players do struggle or get injured.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    The Moon
    Posts
    6,924
    vCash
    1500
    Why does this thread even exist? There is absolutely 0% NO CHANCE IN HELL we get into the playoffs this year. I try to stay optomistic, but come on. This is just insanity.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    29,398
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry777 View Post
    Why does this thread even exist? There is absolutely 0% NO CHANCE IN HELL we get into the playoffs this year. I try to stay optomistic, but come on. This is just insanity.
    If you read the OP you would have read that there is .8%.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCKOI24k_UY


    "You don't know how to drink. Your whole generation, you drink for the wrong reasons. My generation, we drink because it's good, because it feels better than unbuttoning your collar, because we deserve it. We drink because it's what men do."

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    12,927
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by clayamtion View Post
    Baltimore had 7 regulars with a positive ops+, The Mets had 4 including Hairston. Manny Machado replaces one of them.

    Is Tejada as good as Machado? Manny played at 19 last year.
    Let's be fair here.

    Is anyone in our outfield as good as Nick Markakis?

    or Nolan Reimold for that matter?
    Well you're completely ignoring defense and pitching, for one. Second, I'm assuming you're including Betemit's 101 OPS+ while ignoring Duda's comparable 98 OPS+. And Wright's OPS+ is 17 pointers (or more) higher than anyone on that entire team. Not a great method for comparison.

    I'm saying that production-wise, the 2012 Orioles were basically equivalent to the 2012 Mets. Obviously they have more talent than we do. Trust me, I'm never going to be defending the talent we have on this roster.
    "We're snakebitten, baby." --Fred Wilpon

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    12,927
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Marty Mcfly View Post
    No, not in the slightest, if you've won 74 games out of 162 games then you're a 74 win team.

    Luck is just another excuse for failure.

    You can make baseball stats say anything you want, there's so many of them, so many interpretations and approaches, I think fans fall back on stats when reality is too painful, "let's ignore the only stat that matters which is the standings and pretend we're a 90 win WAR team".

    The Orioles are not a great team but they found ways to win, over and over again, and that's all that matters, so did the A's. Not quite sure how Mets fans can talk about outlier seasons when we have won nothing since 2006, and been in the post season one since 2000 - how's that for an outlier?

    Too many baseball fans think the sport is played out on spreadsheets, it's not.
    Okay, we'll stop this "debate" right there. That's a fundamental difference in our mindsets, so no need to go any further. If you don't think luck is a huge factor in BASEBALL, then obviously in-depth statistics are no use to you.
    "We're snakebitten, baby." --Fred Wilpon

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    29,398
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SJ5382 View Post
    Well you're completely ignoring defense and pitching, for one. Second, I'm assuming you're including Betemit's 101 OPS+ while ignoring Duda's comparable 98 OPS+. And Wright's OPS+ is 17 pointers (or more) higher than anyone on that entire team. Not a great method for comparison.

    I'm saying that production-wise, the 2012 Orioles were basically equivalent to the 2012 Mets. Obviously they have more talent than we do. Trust me, I'm never going to be defending the talent we have on this roster.
    The Mets fielded Duda, Thole and Murphy, any discussion about fielding should stop there.

    And they had a bullpen, the Mets didn't. The Mets had 2 starting pitchers with an ERA+ of over 100, Granted one was Dickey. Baltimore had 4.

    There is a reason why Baltimore won and the Mets didn't. In every facet of the game Baltimore was better.


    "You don't know how to drink. Your whole generation, you drink for the wrong reasons. My generation, we drink because it's good, because it feels better than unbuttoning your collar, because we deserve it. We drink because it's what men do."

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    12,927
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by clayamtion View Post
    The Mets fielded Duda, Thole and Murphy, any discussion about fielding should stop there.

    And they had a bullpen, the Mets didn't. The Mets had 2 starting pitchers with an ERA+ of over 100, Granted one was Dickey. Baltimore had 4.

    There is a reason why Baltimore won and the Mets didn't. In every facet of the game Baltimore was better.
    Again, I just think the "count how many players were a bit above league average" argument is ignorant. Looking at it that way, sure, they had a larger variety of talented players I suppose. But we had the Cy Young and a guy who should have been a top 5, maybe top 3 MVP candidate. That makes a substantial difference. IMO, there were many, many teams that were far more productive and won far fewer games.

    I agree their pitching was substantially better, and there fielding was a bit better, but IMO our offense was more productive relative to the park we played in as well as other factors. They hit more home runs, but struck out far more and had terrible speed. As long as we're using BR stats, you should at least consider that Baltimore won 11 more games than their pythagorean W/L. That means something. Bottom line: I think the Orioles were one of the luckiest teams in the history of the game in 2012.
    "We're snakebitten, baby." --Fred Wilpon

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    15,540
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SJ5382 View Post
    Okay, we'll stop this "debate" right there. That's a fundamental difference in our mindsets, so no need to go any further. If you don't think luck is a huge factor in BASEBALL, then obviously in-depth statistics are no use to you.
    Funny how this is supposed to be the "scientific" approach to baseball and yet it uses the totally unscientific concept of "luck" to account for all it's failings. Any spot where the stats didn't work, you just plug in "luck." It's like magic! Except it's... science?

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    29,398
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SJ5382 View Post
    Again, I just think the "count how many players were a bit above league average" argument is ignorant. Looking at it that way, sure, they had a larger variety of talented players I suppose. But we had the Cy Young and a guy who should have been a top 5, maybe top 3 MVP candidate. That makes a substantial difference. IMO, there were many, many teams that were far more productive and won far fewer games.

    I agree their pitching was substantially better, and there fielding was a bit better, but IMO our offense was more productive relative to the park we played in as well as other factors. They hit more home runs, but struck out far more and had terrible speed. As long as we're using BR stats, you should at least consider that Baltimore won 11 more games than their pythagorean W/L. That means something. Bottom line: I think the Orioles were one of the luckiest teams in the history of the game in 2012.
    I'm sorry. My point is ignorant.
    Let me ask you this. Would you rather have 1 .900 ops player & a player with an ops of .700 or would you have two players with an ops of .800?


    "You don't know how to drink. Your whole generation, you drink for the wrong reasons. My generation, we drink because it's good, because it feels better than unbuttoning your collar, because we deserve it. We drink because it's what men do."

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    15,585
    vCash
    1500
    Let's have a fun little exercise, shall we? Here's side by side the teams sorted by WAR (fangraphs batting+fangraphs RA/9), and teams sorted by actual season win total. Without looking it up, guess which list is which. The O's are left out because it would be too much of a giveaway:

    Code:
    Nationals         Nationals 
    Reds              Reds
    Braves            Yankees
    Yankees           Braves
    Cardinals         A's
    Angels            Giants
    Rays              Rangers
    A's               Rays
    Rangers           Angels
    Giants            Cardinals
    D'Backs           Tigers
    Brewers           Dodgers
    White Sox         White Sox
    Dodgers           Brewers
    Tigers            Phillies
    Phillies          D'Backs
    Pirates           Pirates
    M's               Padres
    Padres            M's
    Royals            Mets
    Red Sox           Blue Jays
    Mets              Royals
    Blue Jays         Red Sox
    Twins             Marlins
    Marlins           Indians
    Cubs              Twins
    Rockies           Rockies
    Indians           Cubs
    Astros            Astros
    Last edited by Nymfan87; 01-04-2013 at 02:12 PM.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    15,585
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by clayamtion View Post
    I'm sorry. My point is ignorant.
    Let me ask you this. Would you rather have 1 .900 ops player & a player with an ops of .700 or would you have two players with an ops of .800?
    One .900 OPS player, easy. You can easily upgrade that second ****** player, assuming we're not talking about a 1B and SS (or C) as the two positions.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •